Which satellite have I aligned to?

Maximillian

Hi there,

I am sure that you are sick of newbie questions, but.....

I think I have enough info to figure out how to get the right satellite once I know which one I am currently pointing at.

I just don't know any obvious way of checking which satellite I am pointing at. Is there a straightforward way?
Is there some kind of identifier that the satellite broadcasts that will let me identify it?

Any help appreciated, but if you don't know thats ok.

Thanks,

watty

Check the list of channels you get with www.lyngsat.com. Or buy a 800 Euro tester.

Maximillian

watty wrote:

Check the list of channels you get with www.lyngsat.com. Or buy a 800 Euro tester.

I would have preferred if you had not answered.

It is not what you said. It is how you said it.

You could ask me about some obscure idiom of a programming language and I would do my best to point you in the right direction.

If it was something that could not be done without trial and error then I would tell you that this was so in a helpful manner - doing my best to ensure that you understood why this was the case - or else I would not respond at all.

It is clear from your post that it is not easy to do but that it can be done by reviewing the channels that I can see once I have it tuned. It is also clear that by purchasing expensive professional equipment I could do it much quicker.

Mossy Monk

what would like him to say? guess what the satellite is?

Maximillian

Mossy Monk wrote:

what would like him to say? guess what the satellite is?

nope .. simple courtesy.

Like I said its not the content, it is the delivery.

I got the message. I just don't like the way he said it. Simple as..

Mossy Monk

was it the tone of the text?

Maximillian

Mossy Monk wrote:

was it the tone of the text?

Absolutely.

I do not think that the use of textual communication lessens the need to be courteous in a response.

I might sound petty. I don't know. I don't mean to.

I just expect the same courtesy I extend to others - regardless of the method of communication.

mjsmyth

You seem to be reading a lot into a few words. Everything he said is correct, tuen the channels see what you got and compare them to lyngsat, except he did in less words.

Did you do a search also before you asked the questions? Most questions have been answered many times before.

MJ

Ulsterman 1690

Are you using a $ky digibox

If so see my second posting in this thread

Tony

If you spent a fraction of the time you spent slagging off Watty on a little research you would have found the answer on an existing thread. We have no problem here with newbie questions but attitudes like yours make help less likely.

Maximillian

Ulsterman 1690 wrote:

Are you using a $ky digibox

If so see my second posting in this thread

Thanks - Yes I had seen your post but unfortunately I do not have a digibox. I seen the reference to the Network ID - but it is impossible to infer where this actually comes from. I could not - with the limited other information that I have - find any other information on this. Granted this is most likely a problem with me - but it is easy to find information when you know what you are looking for.

Tony wrote:

If you spent a fraction of the time you spent slagging off Watty on a little research you would have found the answer on an existing thread. We have no problem here with newbie questions but attitudes like yours make help less likely.

I actually spent some time on research as I am often on the other side of newbie questions and know how frustrating it can be.

I could not find a definitive answer for my question one way or the other - although plenty of information around it.

Also - Believe me - There was very little time involved in slagging anyone off.

I don't need to defend myself - nor do I feel that pointing out that I thought his answer was rude, was the wrong thing to do.

watty

I do very compressed replies as I do a LOT of replies to help people. But in over 4 years here no-one has accused me of being rude. Sometimes I'm wrong. Sometimes very opinionated.

You might not like the answer, but in fact it IS the answer. A basic meter less than 800 Euro does not tell you which satellite it is. I have an 800 Euro meter and sometimes I have to get it to list the channels. With a channel list I usually know from experience with www.lyngsat.com which satellite it must be.

On a satellite receiver you can pick the wrong satellite and it will happly scan and make a list of channels. From that you can tell using lyngsat which satellite it must be. I know of no receiver that automatically identifies the satellite. Maybe some do, but it isn't common.

I know ONE guy who can use a spectrum analyser and by experience know which satellite he is looking at. There is maybe ONE receiver on market with that feature built in and though I have seen lots of satellite spectrum I doubt I would know which satellite.

The first answer was the simple straight forward one.

Maximillian
If you had posted a list of channels about a dozen folk would have offered probabily correct suggestions. In absence of that my suggestion is still the best. Possibly the only solution.

I can receive about 22 satellites on an 80cm dish and maybe 28 on a 110cm dish. So there are quite a few possibilities. A compass bearing is usless as it can be up to 20 degrees off due to local effects. 2 or 3 degrees is a different satellite.

Trevord

Hhhmmmmmmmmm………. It must be a quiet day on this forum

I've been on this board for a month or so now. Its a mine of helpful info. This is the first time something like this has kicked off.

I can see why the original poster might have been annoyed.

Equally the poster should recognise the answer is out there by tracking back through the posts or by a general google search (which may have brought the poster here in the first place). I suppose not everyone is very familiar with threads and searching back through them.

I got ticked off by the attitude demonstrated on another forum on the board when my first post there drew newbie flack - I haven't been back there since.

Anyway posting arguments are never resolved – all that merely happens is that one or other poster stops posting

Finally, http://www.lyngsat.com is excellent for what it is and its heavily referenced on this forum, but for a newbie it’s a bit like offering someone a foreign dictionary when what they really need is a language course. It raises as many questions as it answers.

In my view a newbie going to http://www.lyngsat.com for the first time should probably start somewhere like here first.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_television

Tony

Maximillian wrote:

I don't need to defend myself - nor do I feel that pointing out that I thought his answer was rude, was the wrong thing to do.

His answer was not rude and you were wrong, I think you owe Watty an apology and then we can move on.

watty

Trevord wrote:

<snipped stuff you can read above>
In my view a newbie going to http://www.lyngsat.com for the first time should probably start somewhere like here first.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_television

Good point in general.

Also interesting article, that takes a long time to read and doesn't answer the OP's original question. A good article for someone asking what *IS* satellite TV.


Anyway, I'm not looking for any apology. There is no point in arguing about if I gave a rude answer or a good answer.

Lets just start fresh.